Mark L. Goldstein: Middle East peace requires Palestinian compromises

JASON REED, Reuters File Photo

President Barack Obama walks with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (left) and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas (right) before making a statement at the White House on Middle East Peace talks in 2010.

President Barack Obama walks with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (left) and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas (right) before making a statement at the White House on Middle East Peace talks in 2010. (JASON REED, Reuters File Photo)

Opinion: Israeli governments have taken major steps toward peace

In his recent Your View, professor Gary Olson parrots a laundry list criticizing Israel's settlement policy. His use of vitriolic rhetoric intends to portray Israelis as insincere in their negotiations toward a two-state solution. Using such words as "racist" and "apartheid" clarifies nothing.

Israeli settlement policy is undoubtedly controversial. But it is not the core reason for the conflict. Before 1967 when the West Bank, Gaza and Sinai were occupied by Jordan and Egypt, there were no Israeli settlements; there was also no peace.

Arab policy, supported by the Palestine Liberation Organization, was "no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with Israel." Later when Israel agreed to settlement freezes, the Palestinians refused to attend direct negotiations.

Olson's claim that Israel is disingenuous about peace overstates the case, if not being deceptive. Israel has hawkish factions, to be sure, and is wary of giving away too much without gaining the security it needs. But Israeli governments have taken major steps toward peace and dealt honorably with serious Palestinian partners.

In 1979, Israel returned the Sinai Peninsula and evicted thousands of Israeli settlers for peace with Egypt. In 1994, Israel and Jordan established a lasting peace accord. In 2005, Israel withdrew all troops and 8,000 settlers from the Gaza Strip, leaving the area free of Israelis and hoping to move closer to a two-state solution; since then, Hamas terrorists in Gaza have launched nearly 15,000 rockets at Israel.

Two Israeli prime ministers have offered Palestinians an independent state. Both offers were flatly rejected by Palestinian leadership. Current Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has repeatedly voiced his support for direct negotiations and the two-state solution. Israel has proved repeatedly its willingness to make tough decisions, including the dismantling of settlements, to achieve peace.

The world awaits Palestinian compromises, starting with recognition of the Jewish state's right to exist, the containment of Hamas and Hezbollah terrorists, and an end to incitement and hatred in Palestinian textbooks and on public media. And we await the Palestinians' return to direct negotiations.

Olson's accusation that Israel is an apartheid state is factually incorrect. The claim seeks to delegitimize the right of the Jewish people to national independence in their homeland, and it ignores that all Israeli citizens, regardless of religion or ethnicity, share one law code and minorities have full political rights.

Like other liberal democracies, Israel faces challenges in ensuring fair and equitable treatment of its minority citizens. Nevertheless, Israel's track record compares favorably to other pluralistic democracies. Freedoms we all cherish, such as freedom of press, speech, sexual orientation and religion, are centerpieces of Israeli law. In Israel, Jews, Christians and Arabs reside in the same communities, which could not happen under apartheid. And it may not happen in Mahmoud Abbas' planned Palestinian state since he declares it will be devoid of Jews.

Falsely equating Israel to racist and genocidal regimes is exploitative and seeks to delegitimize Israel.

Olson concludes by calling for the end to U.S. aid to Israel. He ignores statements by U.S. military, homeland security, political and diplomatic leadership reflected in the comment by former State Department military attaché Andrew Shapiro: "We don't just support Israel because of a long-standing bond, we support Israel because it is in our national interests to do so."

U.S. aid to Israel benefits American interests. It helps Israelis prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and combat terrorism, thereby aiding U.S. security interests. U.S. aid to Israel promotes peace and stability in the region. The aid leverages Israeli technology resulting in testing and upgrading weaponry the U.S. uses — for example, Israel developed and provided 140-plus upgrades to the F-15 fighter jet. Finally, the vast majority of military aid to Israel is spent on American-made goods and services, and thus helps support American jobs.

Olson's allegiance to a narrative that distorts the reality of Israel does nothing to advance peace. By citing political extremists as representative of all Israelis, he ignores that the Israeli majority favors a two-state solution. Settlements are only one issue of many that must be negotiated directly by Israelis and Palestinians. Our role, as Americans, should be to lift up both narratives and support those who seek peace and reconciliation, not defamation and division.

Mark L. Goldstein is executive director of the Jewish Federation of the Lehigh Valley.